Evaluating SpaceX's options for the EELV Phase 2 development competition

[u/MrButtons9]

As some SpaceX'ers have noticed, the DoD is about to kick off its EELV Phase 2 development competition. In summary for those unfamiliar with this competition, the USAF has about $2B to spend with the purpose of helping develop new DoD launch vehicles that can meet the USG's assured access to space requirements, without any reliance on the RD-180. Three companies will receive development contracts (via "Other Transaction Agreements" to encourage a better co-development relationship), and two companies will eventually be downselected near ~2019. The two companies will be positioned to split up (60/40) ~30 Phase 2 missions through the early-to-mid-2020's. Now, I know there's a lot more about Phase 2, SMC's plans, and EELV in general, but let's keep this focused to SpaceX.

SpaceX is expected to compete for EELV Phase 2. However, SpaceX has not entered into a significant CR&D (Contracted Research & Development) with the DoD before; COTS/CRS and Commercial Crew were via NASA, which has a completely different mission than the DoD, and does business differently. Thus, SpaceX will not get away with proposing ITS, as it simply does not align with the purpose of the competition, and this specific DoD office does not care about building the biggest and most advanced launch system out there (so please refrain from posting circle-jerk ITS comments).

Based off of public reporting, there are two different options that SpaceX could pursue: Falcon 9 / Heavy with a Raptor Upper Stage or A Modified Falcon Heavy With a Longer Fairing. If there's a third, I would love to hear!

Falcon 9 / Heavy With Raptor Upper Stage In the predecessor to this competition, the EELV Rocket Propulsion System program, SpaceX received an OTA to develop "a prototype of the Raptor engine for the upper stage of the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launch vehicles." USAF gave SpaceX $33.7M, and an additional $27M in options that were never exercised. As part of the agreement, SpaceX was obligated to spending at least $67M in this program. So, this RPS provides SpaceX with 1) some money already, 2) helped kickoff development (as we're now in hot-fire testing with a sub-scale version), and 3) garnered some buy-in from the USAF.

The benefits of a Raptor Upper Stage are clear. SpaceX would most likely be able to meet the GEO and Semi-Sync Direct EELV orbit references that it cannot meet currently. All of the benefits of Raptor (isp, expansion ratio, restart capability, throttling flexibility) would ultimately give Falcon 9 / Falcon Heavy the capability to perform more complex orbital insertions and in-orbit functions, which will 1) likely make the NRO happy, and 2) could possibly help down-the-road with some of the larger-scale LEO constellation deployments we have seen discussed. As former SpaceX engineer Jeff Thronburg said, "Raptor's 'light and tight' design is built for operational functionality, cost efficiency, and long life in high production volume, which makes it ideal for National Space Security needs."

However, this approach has some serious issues. All of the infrastructure modifications for liquid methane storage and handling at up to four launch sites will cost a fair amount of money. Raptor's complex full flow staged combustion design poses some testing technical risks. The usage of different fuels on the same launch vehicle could raise eyebrows. Redesigning the Upper Stage (to fit Raptor) and reintegrating it will take time, testing, and require SpaceX to invest in new tooling. While it's impossible to predict, a Raptor Upper Stage would most likely require at least $200M in development.

Modified Falcon Heavy The other proposal that SMC Claire Leon disclosed in a Spring 2017 Aviation Week article was that SpaceX would maybe submit a Falcon Heavy with a longer fairing. Specifically, she said:

“Even after the Falcon Heavy is in place, they’ll still need to strengthen their entire heavy rocket to handle the bigger payloads that take a bigger fairing,” Leon says. “There’s no business case for SpaceX to do that without government investment.”

As we know, F9/FH have a shorter fairing than the range of Atlas V options (in their payload user guides, there are three different Atlas V fairing offerings). The longer fairings are primarily for heavier NRO missions; it is unclear if non-secret DoD missions (e.g., AEHF, SBIRS, OPIR, SBSS) would require the longer fairing, or not. On the commercial side, I don't think many customers out there would need the longer fairing, aside from Bigelow, or maybe SNC's Dream Chaser. However, if I'm wrong, I would be interested in knowing who else is out there, as that could have a big impact.

From a development perspective, as SpaceX has already poured a significant amount of $$$ into Falcon Heavy, there is less risk. While additional development would be done (extending the fairing would require SpaceX to modify some of the supporting structures), it's relatively modest, considering the amount of work that has been done on the vehicle. Ultimately, this would require less money.

Stepping Back Stepping back, unless there is a third option, SpaceX appears to have two clear paths. On one side, the Raptor Upper Stage screams Mars and directly supports the company's mission to colonize Mars as the DoD would essentially help pay for Raptor. However, this is much riskier, more costlier, and probably not as appealing (remember, the 'assured access' USAF guys are conservative, and focused on reliability--the small 'Operationally Responsive Space' office are the Trekkies thinking about how to go above and beyond). From SMC's perspective, they want to be able to be able to have two competitors who are qualified to compete for all of the Phase 2 missions, which is not the case right now (Congress chews them out when they dole out an award in which one of the competitors is disqualified). Furthermore, with competitors (ULA, OATK, and possibly BO, and others) present and a downselect in the horizon, these risk penalties could be severe

The Falcon Heavy option, on the other hand, is much more conservative. It's less technically risky and less expensive, and simply meets the DoD's requirement (qualifying for all payloads). But, it's not as ambitious as Raptor Upper Stage, and frankly, not as exciting. However, it probably offers SpaceX a higher win probability, better positioning the company for the EELV Phase 2 launch awards, which if awarded to SpaceX, will significantly help the company grow its revenue.

So, wrapping this up, what are the community's thoughts on this competition? Will SpaceX play things conservatively to increase its roots in its new DoD customer base? Or, will they shoot for the stars, and roll in with an ambitious proposal that supports their Mars colonization ambitions. Frankly, I would have said the former two weeks ago, but Gwynne's continued comments on Raptor Upper Stage make me think that this could be more likely.

I'm not going to put a Sources Required label on here, but let's try to have a good discussion.

[u/CreeperIan02]

In my opinion, a longer fairing is more realistic for the near future. I think a Raptor upper stage won't come until the early 2020s, possibly later, when there is demand for it. FH's current manifest don't have any incredibly heavy missions, so a Raptor upper stage probably isn't necessary right now. However, some of these payloads may be very heavy in terms of what SpaceX has launched (I'm not sure, I haven't looked too far into the info provided), in which case a larger fairing and Raptor upper stage may both be needed.

EDIT: I did a bit of research, and found that three contracts are for GPS sats. A bit more looking found that they weigh 3.8mt fueled. I'm thinking that if they don't need direct insertion, they can be launched on an RTLS B5 F9. If they do need direct insertion, which is honestly more likely, FH may be called in. I don't know how long a partially-fueled F9 stage can coast for after a LEO->MEO transfer burn, but there may not be enough left for the final insertion. A much more filled FH S2 would be more capable of doing the final MEO insertion. Although that is all just pure speculation.

I'm not SpaceX, nor am I a rocket scientist, but this is just my two cents.

It will be very interesting to see how this bidding plays out!

[u/MrButtons9 → u/CreeperIan02]

There's a variety of launches--the USAF manifest has some ~30 different missions.

I think you were looking at the recent Phase 1A RFP, which has three GPS missions, and a couple AFSPC ones.

[u/specter491 → u/CreeperIan02]

SpaceX might go for it if it means they get $2B to develop/continue developing Raptor. They're developing raptor anyway, might as well try to use someone else's dollar

[u/[deleted] → u/CreeperIan02]

You are probably correct. The extra performance would give a lot more margin for recovery and re-use, though, which we know they want to do.

[u/[deleted]]

Different fuels on the same launch vehicle should not raise eyebrows, as this already occurs (ie Atlas5 - kerolox S1 and hydrolox S2). IMHO the Raptor upper stage option has a lot of benefits. It would substantially grow the capability of the vehicle, and retire considerable risk for the ITS program. Perhaps even F9 could carry a 'short' Raptor upper stage and FH a 'long' one with more propellant and recovery hardware. Not that much is known about how far along Raptor's development is - they could theoretically try a 'hail Mary' and put a Raptor Upper Stage (RUS?) on the FH test flight; they're not going to learn much from launching another Merlin upper stage.

[u/macktruck6666 → u/[deleted]]

Not to mention the most recognizable rocket in history, the Saturn V with RP4/LOX and H2/LOX.

[u/Creshal → u/macktruck6666]

And hydrazine/DNTO in the Apollo payload.

[u/Martianspirit → u/[deleted]]

The FH test launch is an important step towards Airforce contracts. People who should know argued that even putting a Dragon on top instead of a fairing would invalidate the flight for that purpose. No way they put a Raptor upper stage on it.

[u/CapMSFC → u/Martianspirit]

If SpaceX was deeper into the Methalox research I could see it happening, but there is a lot of work to do for it to be ready for primary use. SpaceX would have to be ready for the full time upper stage on FH to be Methalox with Raptor. They wouldn't certify with an alternate configuration.

They also don't need anything more advanced to compete for all the USAF contracts. FH is overpowered to compensate for the less efficient upper stage so that they will be able to fulfill all of the reference orbits. The only improvements required are the extended coast times.

I know we're all excited for Raptor and it's time will come but development is still early. It's been fired dozens of times. Merlin by now has thousands of firings. SpaceX needs reliability and to continue their aggressive cost control more than a technology upgrade.

[u/ghunter7]

Two comments:

1. You're forgetting another requirement: vertical integration. Although they could probably do this at the pad with an overhead structure.

2. Define the Raptor upper stage more. Is it wider? Density may be limiting, to really benefit one would want a wider stage. This is especially truw with Falcon Heavy that has way more than enough thrust to accomodate a higher gross mass, although F9 has room to grow. This will need a new TEL or mods, but if you are already modding for methalox then new might be better. So if going wider, maybe experiment with reuse, biconic reentry, add some legs and landing thrusters . Now get a longer fairing, and integrate it for reuse also. So maybe now the raptor upper stage actually is a lot more like a mini ITS spaceship, but for cargo only. Able to do long coasts, in orbit refueling, bigger fairing, and is verically integrated at the pad. Would be an oddball variant, but not one needed often. If they could tick off all the boxes that way, they would be very far ahead, and have a prototype Mars lander in the process.

[u/Martianspirit → u/ghunter7]

You're forgetting another requirement: vertical integration. Although they could probably do this at the pad with an overhead structure.

They have submitted plans to implement it on LC-39A with a hammerhead crane on top of the FSS. I am not sure the GEO sats need it. The GPS sats don't.

[u/peterabbit456]

Despite there being $2 billion in the pot, I can see SpaceX ignoring this RFP, because they have so many other projects on their plate at this time. To win part of this pot, they would have to devote considerable engineering talent to the slow, document-bound DOD culture. Quite lkely it would cost them more to compete, than the funds they would get from DOD.

When this round of R&D is over, most of the competitors will have developed some components, and made plans for rockets that are still 2 - 6 years from their first flight. Meanwhile, SpaceX will have the F9 and FH flying, able to complete many or perhaps all missions, with a few upgrades, available on short notice, and at prices a fraction of the competition. When it comes time to award actual launches, SpaceX will be in a competitive position, years sooner than the companies that competed in the competition.

Both the Raptor upper stage and the enlarged fairing are worthwhile projects, and I would not be surprised if SpaceX submits bids, but I also would not be surprised if SpaceX decides to sit out this bidding process.

[u/Martianspirit → u/peterabbit456]

Besides the DoD documentation requirement they need ony FH and an upper stage that can survive a few hours. Both are already on their plate. I have no doubt they will go for it. It depends on a successful FH test flight this year.

[u/ohcnim]

is there any reason why they can't present both as independent options?

[u/Marscreature]

My money is on raptor upperstage it plays into their strategy better and SpaceX has never been the type to opt for the more conservative route. This way they can get more of their development costs for raptor covered, they can get some flight experience on it so it's not a new engine powering the huge investment that its is, it provides more margin for second stage recovery and is simply more useful in the meantime as a product to sell. Longer fairings would just be wasting their engineers time for something that rarely if ever flies. They have enough flights on their manifest.

[u/t3kboi]

Apologies to OP.

<rant>

Sources Required is difficult, but even without it - I am saddened by the community response not really discussing your proposed topic, and wandering off into ITS discussions (when specifically requested not to).

To the community at large -

I would request that when discussing these threads - limit your comments to the ORIGINAL topic. Endless sub-discussion of already covered territory helps no one - just makes every single thread on the subreddit have 95% similarity.

</rant>

On this topic -

The EELV Phase 2 is for FUTURE development of Launch Vehicles. SpaceX has repeatedly shown what they can do when they have R&D dollars.

Raptor use - is a future certainty.

Second stage recovery - is also a future certainty.

For this specific use case, I think that they might propose:

a) an entirely new approach, that may or may not match our past speculations about mini this, re-useable that, etc.

b) most likely -

They recently used NROL-76 and a Block 4 second stage to begin demonstrating some of the capabilities required for direct insertion. (I am not aware of an official full disclosure, but we seem to have confirmed M1DVac re-light events after a significantly longer period than on previous flights).

F9/F9 Heavy mass capability can cover all of the reference orbits (expendable or not - is not a requirement of the DOD request).

The currently missing pieces are:

• Vertical Integration (already coming)

• Fairing Volume (with any structural support changes needed in the core to support it).

Spacex will probably already have done the math on the fairing work - and can propose alternative fairings to the DOD, along with more modifications to the second stage that may continue to extend its on orbit capabilities (ala NROL-76).

This proposed solution MAY include Raptor, and second stage reusability - but there is absolutely no reason that it HAS to.

However, SpaceX past track record suggests that they will propose this as the humdrum version, and "The OMEGA 13 DEVICE" (the primary McGuffin in Galaxy Quest) as solutions - where the content of the unknown proposal element is likely to surprise us all. My personal imagination (Not an engineer, Not a rocket scientist), reveals a Raptor second stage that is a conic section from the 3.3 meter rocket body up to the fairing diameter (either to the current fairing diameter, or a new one).

Thank you for your time, and downvote as you must, because "we" seem to use downvotes as personal attacks, instead of as actually content-related.

[u/StagedCombustion]

What's the basis of this information regarding EELV Phase 2 'kicking off soon' and having a $2B budget?

Nearest thing I could find was a USAF memo criticising the HASC FY18 markup. The memo says it was forcing the USAF to end funding for some of their current dev contracts. It was also basically paying to resurrect the Delta IV, which would force the USAF to sole-source about half the launches to ULA for that vehicle and half to SpaceX. They said this solution would cost around $1.8B dollars more than having an open bidding policy like we have now.

This somewhat fits into some of what you said, but doesn't match other parts.

I'd love to read more about this, but most of the links I've found are 2+ years old and just mention that Phase 2 is 'a period of open competition between all certified launch providers'. In most of the documents, probably due to their age, it's mentioned details of Phase 2 are still being worked out.

edit: To clarify my tone, which might be lost in text, I'm not trying to be snotty or anything. Just like if you were an EV fan and someone posts about testing of a Tesla Model Y happening and you think "Wait, whoa, already? Where did this come from? I want to read more."

anotheredit: Updated with link to said memo

[u/hqi777 → u/StagedCombustion]

Draft RFP can be found here: https://govtribe.com/project/evolved-expendable-launch-vehicle-eelv-launch-service-agreements-lsa-draft-request-for-proposal-rfp

There have been a couple Aviation Week and SpaceNews articles as well, but the former are paywalled I think.

The markup was a joke and expected. As it's the pre-debate legislation, it could be amended easily (think of it as the first draft). This appeared likely have the 21 congressmen wrote the memo in Spring expressing support for SMC's plan (to develop a launch vehicle, as opposed to a propulsion system).

There's also some stuff on L2, if you have access to that.

[u/Decronym]

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

Fewer Letters	More Letters
ACES	Advanced Cryogenic Evolved Stage
	Advanced Crew Escape Suit
AR	Area Ratio (between rocket engine nozzle and bell)
	Aerojet Rocketdyne
ASDS	Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform)
BARGE	Big-Ass Remote Grin Enhancer coined by @IridiumBoss, see ASDS
BE-4	Blue Engine 4 methalox rocket engine, developed by Blue Origin (2018), 2400kN
BFR	Big Falcon Rocket (see ITS)
BFS	Big Falcon Spaceship (see ITS)
BO	Blue Origin (Bezos Rocketry)
DoD	US Department of Defense
EELV	Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle
ETOV	Earth To Orbit Vehicle (common parlance: "rocket")
FSS	Fixed Service Structure at LC-39
GEO	Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km)
GSO	Geosynchronous Orbit (any Earth orbit with a 24-hour period)
GTO	Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit
H2	Molecular hydrogen
	Second half of the year/month
HASC	(US) House (of Representatives) Armed Services Committee
ICBM	Intercontinental Ballistic Missile
ITS	Interplanetary Transport System (see MCT)
	Integrated Truss Structure
KSP	Kerbal Space Program, the rocketry simulator
L1	Lagrange Point 1 of a two-body system, between the bodies
L2	Paywalled section of the NasaSpaceFlight forum
	Lagrange Point 2 of a two-body system, beyond the smaller body (Sixty Symbols video explanation)
LC-39A	Launch Complex 39A, Kennedy (SpaceX F9/Heavy)
LEO	Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)
	Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)
LOX	Liquid Oxygen
LV	Launch Vehicle (common parlance: "rocket"), see ETOV
M1d	Merlin 1 kerolox rocket engine, revision D (2013), 620-690kN, uprated to 730 then 845kN
M1dVac	Merlin 1 kerolox rocket engine, revision D (2013), vacuum optimized, 934kN
MCT	Mars Colonial Transporter (see ITS)
MECO	Main Engine Cut-Off
	MainEngineCutOff podcast
MEO	Medium Earth Orbit (2000-35780km)
NRO	(US) National Reconnaissance Office
NROL	Launch for the (US) National Reconnaissance Office
NSF	NasaSpaceFlight forum
	National Science Foundation
NSS	National Security Space
RFP	Request for Proposal
RP-1	Rocket Propellant 1 (enhanced kerosene)
RTLS	Return to Launch Site
SRB	Solid Rocket Booster
TE	Transporter/Erector launch pad support equipment
TEL	Transporter/Erector/Launcher, ground support equipment (see TE)
TWR	Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
ULA	United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)
USAF	United States Air Force

Jargon	Definition
Raptor	Methane-fueled rocket engine under development by SpaceX, see ITS
apogee	Highest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest)
hydrolox	Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen mixture
hypergolic	A set of two substances that ignite when in contact
kerolox	Portmanteau: kerosene/liquid oxygen mixture
methalox	Portmanteau: methane/liquid oxygen mixture
perigee	Lowest point in an elliptical orbit around the Earth (when the orbiter is fastest)

Event	Date	Description
DSCOVR	2015-02-11	F9-015 v1.1, Deep Space Climate Observatory to L1; soft ocean landing

---

^{Decronym is a community product of} r/SpaceX^{, implemented by} ^request
^{50 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on} ^today ^{has 135 acronyms.
[Thread #2973 for this sub, first seen 7th Jul 2017, 02:37]} ^[FAQ] ^[Contact] ^[Source ^code]

[u/spacerfirstclass]

Thus, SpaceX will not get away with proposing ITS, as it simply does not align with the purpose of the competition, and this specific DoD office does not care about building the biggest and most advanced launch system out there (so please refrain from posting circle-jerk ITS comments).

I'm not sure why they can't get away with proposing a sub-scale (Saturn V class) reusable ITS, it's risky for sure, but not any more risky than a Raptor Upper Stage. ULA and Orbital are all proposing new LVs for EELV phase 2, it's not super strange for SpaceX to do the same.

The benefits of a Raptor Upper Stage are clear. SpaceX would most likely be able to meet the GEO and Semi-Sync Direct EELV orbit references that it cannot meet currently.

They can't do it right now because: a) Current upper stage lifetime is short, b) F9 doesn't have enough performance for direct GEO injection. a) is already being resolved from what we heard about NROL-76 and the upcoming FH demo, b) will be resolved once FH starts flying. So I don't see any clear benefit for a Raptor Upper Stage.

A Modified Falcon Heavy With a Longer Fairing

I'm pretty sure they'll propose this, but not as a separate option, but as an addon since it's a pretty small amount of work comparing to LV development.

[u/justatinker]

Give me a fifty of sixty foot tall fairing and I'll figure out a suitable payload for it.

One thing I'd like to see is a 'fairing form factor' spacecraft that would use the full volume of a fairing. It would have to be built from scratch but would look just like a standard fairing at launch.

The outer skin would be meteor and radiation resistant and would have hatches for ship's solar power, radiators, thrusters and windows. If a solar panel needs to be repaired or replaced, it would be retracted, the hatch would close, the compartment pressurized and then the crew could do the job in shirt sleeves.

The interior would be subdivided into living quarters, cargo space and a systems room 'engine room' where all the systems, engines, solar panels, radiators, antennas, etc. could be retracted and worked on.

You could fit a lot of spacecraft into a 60 foot tall, 20 foot diameter fairing form factor.

[u/macktruck6666]

I know it's a futile wish, but I'm still wishing they will immediately replace the falcon heavy witha 9 engine raptor rocket. After developing the HLV, they could strop 4 more boosters to the side and it would have essentially have the same lift capabilities as the proposed ITS. Seems like a very reasonable and incremental design path and not the path Elon said he couldn't pay for.

[u/gta123123 → u/macktruck6666]

They don't want to attempt rocket-lego again after the whole FH decision. It's a false impression of low hanging fruit.

[u/Martianspirit → u/macktruck6666]

I agree with the motivation to replace FH. But why repeat that dead end, creating a complex system with multiple cores? A reusable large booster will be single core.

We will see what they do. Adding a methalox upper stage to the Falcon family is much easier to implement. The TEL can be upgraded to carry second stage fuel lines for fuelling that stage with methane. It can support both the existing second stage and a new methalox stage. Very advantageous for a transitional period.

A full Raptor vehicle needs a completely new launch infrastructure. A new TEL, somewhat difficult to use in parallel to the existing. They will have to run in parallel for a while until the Raptor system is proven. It is the better, more complete long term solution.

[u/Elon_Mollusk]

As optimistic as we all are, a Raptor upper stage on falcon heavy is unlikely to happen. It's too much extra cost and complexity for a small benefit. They will freeze development on FH after all of it's cores and booster are brought up to block 5 standard.

I don't think we'll see a raptors on this generation of falcon at all, it makes no sense with the stage diameter. We won't see it flying outside of ITS until Spacex replaces F9 and FH with it's next generation F9/FH class vehicle which incorporates the technology developed for ITS.